Anonymous Coach "Scouting Report" on Michigan Football
This is an informed outsider's take on our team:
"“If you took the name Michigan off, most coaches in the country would be happy to have the success they’ve had, happy to have the players on that roster,” the coach said. “Most of us wish we could hit nine and 10 wins a year as a baseline. But they’re Michigan, so we all expect them to be better. ... They look undecided on offense, like there's too many cooks. No one thinks that's the exact offense Josh Gattis wants to be calling. The defense fell apart on them, and now they might go to a more NFL-style 3-4; that's gonna be really interesting to see. ... A smart way to look at this program is the quarterback position. When is the last time they've had game-changing QB play? They're overhauling the QB room because they know it's been a weak spot. They recruit really well, byt [sic] they still lack top-end speed Ohio State has. I don't think you could call anything they've done under Jim Harbaugh explosive. ...When you look at them from outside, you see a successful program pretty much everywhere but on the field against their true peers. That’s really what it boils down to. They don’t need a complete change, but they have to identify what separates their offensive scheme and their development from the programs they expect to beat. This is a good program. But they’re Michigan, so you can’t be unremarkable."
You can find this at https://www.google.com/amp/s/247sports.com/college/michigan/Article/mic…
No they don't. They can get great players from 10 other states.
Will Johnson and Daylen Baldwin.
This quote is so perfect, especially coming from an outside source.
”When you look at them from outside, you see a successful program pretty much everywhere but on the field against their true peers.”
Which is another way of saying that it is an unsuccessful program from an insider point of view.
Yup. It’s like my boss saying, “You’re great at everything you do, except your job.”
I disagree. It's basically saying "They're winning most/all of the games they are supposed to win, but none of the games they need to be elite."
OP = "reasonable fan" take
The comments to which you're responding = "disgruntled fans who are trying to be clever"
We lost to Indiana for the first time in 75% of this board’s life. Split games with Wisco and PSU… wait no we lose those now. And we lose to MSU as major favorites. Give me a break… Michigan doesn’t win the games it’s supposed to or else we’d only lose once or twice a season.
Yeah, .500 against MSU ain't winning the games you are supposed to win. Its choke city. Forget OSU, which is in another galaxy from us, try just consistently beating a rival that's almost never the favorite.
"They look undecided on offense, like there's too many cooks. No one thinks that's the exact offense Josh Gattis wants to be calling."
This is a problem that we've all seen, and most of us have expressed, for the last couple of years that Gattis has been here. We like what he was a part of with PSU and Bama, but we have only seen glimpses - few and far between - of anything resembling those dynamic offenses. What we've seen a lot of is the same things the offense has run since Harbaugh first installed it with Jed Fisch and Tim Drevno. It hasn't really evolved...
The defense has not held this program back, despite its implosion last year. The offense is solely to blame for every missed opportunity this team has experienced since 2015.
This is the point I've been making for the entire Harbaugh era. That he has WAY more influence on the play calls, player substitutions, formations, what-have-you then he wants to admit. Back when we had the infamous playcalling by committee who do you think got the final say on what we ran? And I could not agree more that the offense Gattis is calling does not look anything like "speed in space". Rather it's "plodding in a small area" where TE's are featured.
I would love to see Gattis actually call the plays HE wants to run - not the ones he thinks (or is told) make Harbaugh happy.
That he has WAY more influence on the play calls
I still don't know why everyone just assumes this is the case. People act like Harbaugh is calling some/most plays, telling Gattis what plays to call, or whatever else. Do we actually have ANY evidence of this happening?
I would assume that Harbaugh has input on critical plays and maybe has straight up called a play here and there, but this is one of those widely held viewpoints that I just don't understand. The offense has been bad, so it must be Harbaugh calling plays!
I think the reason the notion that "Harbaugh is calling the plays" stems from the fact that the offense we've been running since Gattis was put in nominal control of the offense has all too often not resembled "speed in space" in the minds of the fans.
It's understandable that disappointed fans will look for reasons to explain this, and "Harbaugh is meddling in play calling" is an easy thing to latch on to, even if there isn't any identifiable and authoritative evidence in support of it.
The evidence is that the offense hasn't been good enough for seven years. You can blame that on the guy who has only been here for 2 but that doesn't make much sense to me. It's not really an individual play thing but a philosophical one that seems to be set on winning every game with defense in the era of offense.
Do we have any evidence he's not calling plays? We should make the guess from what we know. Why is the default that he's barely involved with play calling? Especially since we know it's been by committee, Harbaugh has said that himself, and as Don mentioned, it's looked more like Harbaugh's offenses than speed in space. The fact that Bench Mason started as a DT in 2019 but then was a featured FB again in 2020 says a lot. He would have been great in a different offense, but everything seemed so disjointed. It's obvious that's not how Gattis wants to run things.
2018 and 2019 defense kinda held us back. OSU picked a part our Defense because we left our corners exposed and they got exposed. So, while the offense hasn't been spectacular, the defense has embarrassed us way more than the offense.
Too many cooks. Aside from the fact that Jim doesn't consider it important, this is the nuts-and-bolts reason why we don't use tempo. They told us outright a few years ago that play selections would come in to Jim and Jim would have the final say. I would not be surprised if that is still happening, at least to some degree. The offense has always had some degree of Jim's fingerprints on it as long as he's been here.
spot on, particularly QB production. they wont recruit at osu level but many teams have shown you dont need 1st rounders to get big QB impact
Perfectly said. Nothing stated there was wrong or inaccurate in any way.
Yay!? Waves tiny flag
I think one of the key sentences in there is "I don't think you could call anything they've done under Jim Harbaugh explosive."
When you think back to 2014, nobody was expecting "explosive" when Michigan hired Harbaugh. They were expecting fullbacks, two-tight end sets, and a "plow through 'em" attitude. That's what they had and did so well in 2016. But in the years that followed, Harbaugh decided to try to modernize the offense with "speed in space," which is a concept that was completely foreign to him. Most people were clamoring for the modernization of the offense, but perhaps it pushed Harbaugh too far out of his comfort zone and he's never going to really be able to thrive with it.
Yes in 16 with Hoke’s kids it was run very well. Go back and check recruiting of OL when he first took over and his first full year of recruiting. That is where he failed the most in getting the proper depth to run that type of offense.
Now no matter what anyone wants to admit you have a mixture of what Jim wants and what Gattis wants and it doesn’t work. We are scheming to get Erik All the ball the most for crying out loud.
Thanks to Drevno. Setting aside scheme for a second, recruiting has been a weak spot for a number of Harbaugh's hires on both sides of the ball. They've had some good overall classes but also weaknesses in key areas.
....and whose fault is that??? I'll hang up and listen.
Didn't think I had to explicitly say Harbaugh is ultimately responsible since, you know, he hired them
Cumong, man. Everyone knows that ankle flexion is the king of recruiting.
"When is the last time they've had game-changing QB play?"
To be or not to be is the question; can we go back to Chad Henne or maybe Drew Henson? It's been a long time. I hope there is that one guy in the 2021 QB room who will give us hope this coming season.
Oh I dunno if you have to go back THAT far.
That Robinson guy was pretty damn good if I remember correctly.
Denard was a RB playing QB. Guy was an int waiting to happen in passing situations. He was one of the best runners of all time at Michigan. As a QB not even in the discussion
As opposed to those incredible passing threats at OSU like Troy Smith or Braxton Miller?
Denard was 1 - 2 against OSU as a starting QB. I'll take that all day long thank you very much.
Thanks for turning the discussion into what OSU had. Last I checked Michigan has had far better overall QB play in its history than OSU.
You take whatever you want. If Beating a .500 Luke Fickell interim coach team is what you envision as greatness than have at it
Troy Smith:
63% completions
4.2 TD per INT
157.1 QB rating
Braxton Miller:
60% completions
3.1 TD per INT
146.7 QB rating
Denard:
57% completions
1.3 TD per INT
138.6 QB rating
Did you seriously just post Denard stats without even talking about rushing? He ran for 1500 more yards than Barrett. 6.2 ypc compared to 5.0 for Barrett. And Barrett had way better weapons around him. Also, Denards worst QBR after his freshman year was his senior year under Hoke. Give him another year under RR and his stats would look a lot better I bet.
42! Rushing TDs you failed to mention.
"A RB playing QB". Bullshit. Denard Robinson is #5 all time in passing yards at Michigan. #4 all time in TDs. His YPA is higher than everyone else in the top 10 in yards except for... Jim Harbaugh. His passer rating of 138.6 puts him ahead of Drew Henson, Tom Brady, Chad Henne and Brian Griese.
Get out of here with the "RB" bullshit. Just because he's got the 2nd most rushing TDs in Michigan history? Would you call Rick Leach or Steve Smith an INT machine? Denard was a better QB than both.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/schools/michigan/passing.html
Denard had a completion percentage of 57% over his four years at Michigan and threw 49 TD's and 39 INT's.
Which is top 4-5 all time at UM ..... and on par with Henne
This perspective seems narrow. If he were a great qb, I think he would have had more success in the NFL. His passing was greatly augmented by his ruining ability. If he went a 4.3 rubber he wouldn't have had near the passing stats. I think it's fair to say his passing wasn't great but he's an amazing athlete.
But... he was a great runner. From the QB position.
"Without his great accuracy Tom Brady sure would be a shitty QB."
Ok? Yeah. I'm not sure if you're trying to argue or fight or aggressively disagree or what your point is.
Accuracy and better than 2:1 TD:int would be great. Denard's running opened the pass game. Most qb's are graded based on all of their passing stats. Denard threw for a ton of yards, yes. And he made a lot of bad decision and was not more than middling on his accuracy. It's ok. He was a good fit for what RR wanted. But if you give me an option for Chad Henne or Tom Brady or Denard, I'm not picking Denard. You can.
no one here is arguing he is a great all-time QB. He was a game changer, which was what the original discussion was about. He's also top 4-5 QBs all time in Michigan history. That says more about the level of QB Michigan has recruited/developed though IMO.
I'd definitely agree with this. And their utilization in particular. Lloyd was great at recruiting and developing QBs, just never wanted to score too many points, it seemed until that bowl game against Florida. Moeller was a little more aggressive.
Nah, I can't agree he's "top 4-5 QBs all time in Michigan history." The game has changed, the position has changed, strategy has changed, and hell, freshman used to not even play. Comparing him on stats alone to quarterbacks from other eras isn't fair.
Besides, if we're going to base it on stats, we should presumably include wins, wins over rivals, and championships, right? Just in my lifetime -- so I'll skip Tom Harmon -- give me Rick Leach, Tom Brady, Elvis Grbac, Jim Harbaugh, and Chad Henne. Also, don't downplay a guy named Dennis Franklin: Three straight Big Ten Championships from 1972 to 1974, finishing with 30 wins, 2 losses and 1 tie.
Calling Robinson an all-time Michigan great isn't supported by the facts. He was a damned good quarterback (and a lot of fun to watch), on some otherwise mediocre teams. But ... frankly, I'd even rather have Gardner, with a good team.
How many wins over Ohio State did Henne have?
Denard went 14 for 17 (QB rating of 223, 3 TDs, 0 Ints) and tacked on another 170 yards (!) in rushing in the last victory UM had over OSU.
The lack of respect is amazing....
I dunno, I would argue he was an all-time great quarterback here.. per the stats listed above, 5th in all time yards, 4th in passing touchdowns, 138 QB rating. Those are all pretty impressive statistics.
It is absolutely true that his running ability is what opened up his throwing lanes to pass, but why should that matter (I know that's not your point, it's more challenging the thought that he wasn't a great quarterback.. why not?).
The stats that underline, in my opinion, the point: 1st all time in rushing touchdowns for a QB (4th all time overall); 4th in passing touchdowns all time. The guy scored touchdowns at an incredible rate, which ultimately was his job as the leader of the offense. I would argue he is in fact an all-time great quarterback, even if he wasn't the most elite passer.
John Freaking Navarre also has some really good passing stats, and he was a mediocre QB. There’s a reason Denard did not even get a chance to QB in the pros—it is really okay to acknowledge that his success as a passer was all due to how amazing he was as a runner. Same with Steve White at WVU and even Tebow at UF and Smith and BB at OSU.
Denard threw a lot of really bad passes, which is why Gardner was there at the end. Gardner lost out on being the next pro QB because Denard the runner was exciting and an ultimate competitor, but he was not a good passer. He had a decent arm, but he was inaccurate and made bad decisions he would then later make up for with his feet against lesser competition and Notre Dame.
Steve White at WVU
Pat White (w/ Steve Slaton at RB)
Good old Steve White at WVU. That guy never existed.
And Navarre had a pretty strong career.
It almost as though the game changed completely...
Robinsons best year in QB (basically 150) rating put him #20 in the country.
In 2000 a 150 would have been #8.
In 1990 a 150 would have been #4.
In 1980 a 150 would have been #2.
In 1970 a 150 would have been the best QB in the country.
In 2020 that 150 gets you barely into the top 30.
Denard had the same completion % as Drew Henson: 57.2
Yeah, Don. That's not something to crow about there. That's not great. And I wouldn't consider Henson one of Michigan's greats.